NATO Sees Flaws in Air Campaign Against Qaddafi – NYTimes.com

Despite widespread praise in Western capitals for NATO’s leadership of the air campaign in Libya, a confidential NATO assessment paints a sobering portrait of the alliance’s ability to carry out such campaigns without significant support from the United

via NATO Sees Flaws in Air Campaign Against Qaddafi – NYTimes.com.

I’m too tired to read the whole thing. One of you smart commenters do that for me, willya?

I’ll just say this- Coalition warfare is always tough. If the campaign wasn’t perfect, it was good enough.

That’s not to say I was a supporter of the campaign. If Europe felt like doing that, fine. But for the US to participate without the President so much as asking Congress, and yet citing NATO (but not Article 5) as the authorizing authority… well, it’s just wrong.

And while I haven’t read the article, I did skim enough to see that trying to utilize a similar campaign in Syria would be fraught with risks.

After all, the political outcome in Libya wasn’t exactly in line with our goals, whatever our military successes. And I suspect Syria would be more of the same, but at a far higher price.

1 thought on “NATO Sees Flaws in Air Campaign Against Qaddafi – NYTimes.com”

  1. If, say, Hungary had attacked Italy, we would have been obligated to go to war with Hungary because of the NATO treaty. Last I looked, and I just may have overlooked something, the Daffy guy didn’t attack any NATO member, so NATO obligations had nothing to do with anything we did. What the Kenyan did was patently illegal, and that Congress didn’t boot him from Office by the end of the week shows that Congress has no stones whatever, and no regard for the Constitution or their prerogatives.

Comments are closed.